If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Investor's Business Daily - 1-4-2010

When I went to pick up a WSJ on New Years Day there were none, but there was an IBD, so I bought it. Most Financial publications have a good year end synopsis, with usually some business recommends for the coming year. IBD is thorough in their coverage & probably more of a business community publication than the WSJ so I spend a good deal of time on each article searching for nuggets. IBD also seems to point out the impact of the governmental decision making process better than WSJ.

Today I arrived at "Issues & Insights", IBD's Editorial page A18. There is one story on the page - "The Day America Lurched Left". Possibly someone with more computerese than I can link the story & the cartoons on page A19.

The story basically reiterates the concerns most intelligent people had about the Messiah's candidacy & subsequent election , including the majority on this forum.

In our first editorial after Barack Obama's historic victory in November 2008, we acknowledged that "we were witnessing an event in which all Americans can take justifiable pride."

"More than any other development," we said, "the election of an African-American as president will show that most of us have indeed moved on, overcoming prejudice and fulfilling the promise than anyone can achieve anything in this great country if they set their mind to it."

But the election of this charismatic and well-spoken new leader may be momentous in another way, we added. "We may have elected not only one of the least experienced candidates in our history, but also one who may be guided by some principles different from what we're used to and on which the nation was founded.

"In fact, we may be installing the first president who openly favors change that, as unaccustomed as we are to the word, can only be described as socialistic."

We didn't use that word lightly. It came only after we thoroughly examined Obama's policy positions and his entire background in a 16-part series that confirmed he was a leftist who would surround himself with radicals bent on redistributing the nation's wealth and taking control of key industries.

The series, titled "Audacity of Socialism," was dismissed by the media elite, including even some conservative pundits, as "over the top." Many frowned on the use of the s word. But now socialist, socialism and neoMarxist are terms used frequently to describe the president's income redistribution schemes, government spending nostrums and shadow Cabinet full of radicals.

Before the election of 2008, few Americans described Obama as liberal, let alone socialist. Polls typically reflect media opinion, and the media by and large portrayed Obama as a moderate. Now his far-left views are obvious, and for the first time most Americans see Obama as governing from the left.

What we warned of then is now governance, though we take no pleasure in the validation. The pending government takeover of the medical system (one-sixth of the economy), as well as the ownership stakes taken in autos and banking, not to mention the demonization and planned destruction of the private insurance industry, were foretold by us, along with the accumulation of power to the federal government in the name of "crisis" upon "crisis."

We also documented Obama's association with Marxists and acolytes of Saul Alinsky, far-left father of community organizing, which predated his appointment of Van Jones, John Holdren, Mark Lloyd, Cass Sunstein and the rest of the statist czars.